The
petitioner, Damon Jerome Richardson, seeks a writ of habeas
corpus challenging The Board of Pardons and Paroles'
[“Board”] denial of his release. The respondent
has filed a motion for summary judgement, arguing that the
petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief.
The petitioner has not filed a response at this time. After
considering the petition, the motion, and the arguments and
authorities submitted, the Court determines that the
respondent's motion for summary judgement should be
treated as a motion to dismiss and, therefore, dismiss the
petitioner's writ without prejudice.

II.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND

While
awaiting trial on a criminal charge, the petitioner was
placed under surveillance in connection with a drug operation
that he managed. The investigation resulted in the seizure of
approximately three kilograms of cocaine as well as over
$225, 000.00. The petitioner pled not guilty to the offense
charged and proceeded to trial on August 27, 1990. A jury
found the petitioner guilty of engaging in organized criminal
activity. On August 31, 1990, the petitioner was sentenced to
life imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
(“TDCJ”) and was fined $10, 000.00. In his
federal writ for habeas corpus, the petitioner challenges
only the denial of parole on the underlying conviction.

In
September of 2015, the Board granted the petitioner a status
which status would allow the petitioner a future parole
release date. On February 17, 2016, the Board withdrew that
status based on substance abuse, a finding that the
petitioner was predisposed to commit future criminal acts and
other new information. Two months later, the petitioner filed
a federal writ of habeas corpus challenging the Board's
decision. The record reflects that the petitioner has yet to
challenge the Board's decision through a state writ of
habeas corpus.

III.PARTIES'
CONTENTIONS

A.
Petitioner's Contentions

The
petitioner's federal writ challenges the Board's
decision concerning his parole release status. In this
regard, the petitioner argues that he is entitled to habeas
relief for the following reasons:

1) The parole system is arbitrary and capricious because
letters and petitions provided by victims, prosecutors, law
enforcement personnel and the general public opposing the
petitioner's parole contain inaccurate information about
his background or circumstances of his offense, and bear no
relationship to the likelihood of harm to the public and the
likelihood of a favorable parole outcome.

2) The acceptance and consideration of protest letters when
making a parole determination is a violation of Equal
Protection.

3) The Board violated his rights when it considered
unadjudicated offenses or offenses extraneous to his
conviction.

Accordingly, the petitioner requests that his parole status
be reinstated so that he may be released on parole.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;B.
The ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.